Man, I'm the only insane guy on here, I guess. I honestly wouldn't mind seeing Zod brought back into the equation. I also wouldn't mind seeing any one of Supes' other rogues gallery members. As long as I like the film and it's quality in my eyes, then I don't give a damn if they use Prankster and Toyman (although they wouldn't be tops of my list).

See, I disagree. I don't necessarily POST on the SHH forum that much, but let me assure you, I have lurked here for QUITE some time now, ESPECIALLY on the SUPERMAN-related message boards, so I'm familiar with a lot of stuff that goes on here -- the typical complaints, nit-picks, etc. And one of the ones that I STILL see A LOT of haters complaining about is Singer's "vague history" idea. This is not to say that YOU disliked this idea, but when I see fans of RETURNS defend it, or try to explain it to the haters, it seems as though even THEY get it wrong and misrepresent what this flick is, making it seem all the more worse to the people who ALREADY hate this flick as it is. Now, I'm going to explain myself further below, but let me say that I firmly believe that RETURNS is more of a sequel to Donner's FIRST SUPERMAN film, and that's IT! Singer even said once in an interview that SUPERMAN II is not really in his "vague history" and he doesn't really even consider it to be that great of a movie. The way I see it, the first SUPERMAN film happens, then stuff in between that WE DO NOT SEE ON THE BIG SCREEN, Superman leaves, and then he returns in SUPERMAN RETURNS. So, really, all of the "references" to SUPERMAN II that people say are in RETURNS and that people claim make RETURNS a "vague" sequel to SUPERMAN II are, in fact, NOT REFERENCES TO SUPERMAN II AT ALL!! Let me explain...

Quote:

Originally Posted by hippie_hunter

1. Lex Luthor knows that location of the Fortress of Solitude and he knows his way around in Superman Returns. Even Kitty says that he acts like he's been there before. In Superman II, Lex found the Fortress of Solitude.

You know, this is the ONE thing that you have against me. I went into RETURNS all four times that I saw it with the mindset that this is a loose sequel to Donner's first SUPERMAN film ONLY; however, having said that, I was a bit taken aback my first time when Kitty muttered this line when she and Lex were in the Fortress of Solitude. And, in all honesty, this is the SOLE thing, the ONE PIECE of evidence, that you guys have to back up your belief that RETURNS is even an iota of loose sequel to SUPERMAN II; however, having said that, there are TWO possible scenarios that could still make RETURNS a loose sequel to ONLY Donner's first SUPERMAN film, and not SUPERMAN II, too. First, who's to say that Lex actually HAS been to the Fortress of Solitude before? Kitty just said it SEEMED like he had been, it doesn't mean he actually has. After all, in the scene before they arrive, they are all on Lex's new yacht, possibly SEARCHING for the Fortress of Solitude. Secondly, OK, let's say he HAS been there before. Who's to say it was the time he was there in SUPERMAN II? It's entirely possible, and it is my strict believe, that after the events of Donner's first SUPERMAN film happen, Superman leaves, Lex becomes a free man because of this, and, somehow, for some reason, discovers and goes to the Fortress of Solitude. Lex plots and plans for Superman's inevitable return, and when the time is right, he RETURNS to the Fortress of Solitude (in RETURNS) and steals the crystals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hippie_hunter

2. Jason White, the son of Superman and Lois Lane. Clark and Lois had sex in the Fortress of Solitude in Superman II. In Superman Returns we have little Jason.

WRONG!! There is never ANY mention that Jason was conceived during the scene in SUPERMAN II where Superman takes Lois to the Fortress of Solitude -- not in the movie, not from Singer, not from ANYONE! And, in fact, as usual, the ONLY people to EVER suggest this was the case were nit-picky, continuity-obsessed fanboys. Seriously, guys, it's not that difficult to understand. Singer stated that he does not consider SUPERMAN II to be in the "vague history" of RETURNS!! It's so very easy to put the pieces together. Listen, like with the example above with Lex and the Fortress of Solitude, the events of Donner's first SUPERMAN film happen and afterward, as time passes, Superman does his same old stuff -- saves people, etc. Meanwhile, he and Lois grow closer and closer, until eventually, one night, he sleeps with her. Time goes by, and eventually, Superman leaves Earth without telling her. She meets Richard, gives birth to the baby, etc, and 5 years later, Superman returns! See? No SUPERMAN II involved AT ALL!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by hippie_hunter

3. Lois doesn't know that Clark is Superman (yet she apparently had sex with him). At the end of Superman II, Lois forgets that Clark is Superman. In Superman Returns, she still doesn't know that Clark is Superman.

OK, now THIS example is just idiotic, man. I mean, come on, I don't even HAVE to debunk this one. You basically say that because Lois doesn't know Clark is Superman in RETURNS, this automatically puts SUPERMAN II in the "vague history" because at the end of SUPERMAN II she doesn't know that Clark is Superman, either. Did you ever stop to think that she also doesn't know he's Superman at the end of Donner's first SUPERMAN film, either? So, RETURNS ALSO can take place after THAT flick, too! Why does Lois EVER have to find out who Superman is, just so she can forget it and not know who he is in RETURNS? Why, in the "vague history," do we HAVE to have her find out who he is? Why can't she just NOT KNOW AT ALL, like she does at the end of Donner's first SUPERMAN film. But you say that, well, she had sex with him in SUPERMAN II, or as I like to say, IN BETWEEN SUPERMAN and SUPERMAN RETURNS. Well, how exactly does THAT make sense? So, Superman cannot have sex with Lois without telling her his secret identity? This is how it happened, in my opinion -- as in the above examples, the events of Donner's SUPERMAN happen, time goes by as before, etc, Superman and Lois grow closer, and Superman eventually has sex with Lois...WITHOUT TELLING HER THAT HE'S ALSO CLARK KENT. Then...HE LEAVES!!

So here we have it folks!! This is MY interpretation of Bryan Singer's "vague history." He doesn't really like SUPERMAN II, and, well, I don't, either (although I cannot WAIT to see Donner's cut of the film -- THAT I am SURE I will enjoy and wouldn't mind if it were included in the "vague history" to SUPERMAN RETURNS. The only problem is it hadn't been released yet when Singer was making RETURNS. Oh, well).

Anyway, this is a recap of how it ALL happens: after the events Donner's first SUPERMAN film happen, some time goes by, Superman and Lois get closer, they eventually sleep together (and he does NOT divulge his secret identity to her), scientists announce that they think they've found Krypton, Superman leaves Earth without telling Lois, Lex Luthor then becomes a free man when Superman fails to show up at Lex's trial. Wondering where the man who ruined his life went, Lex embarks on a 5-year-long journey to discover more about his enemy, preparing for his inevitable return. In the process, he discovers the Fortress of Solitude. Meanwhile, Lois meets Richard, and she has a baby. Years later, hurt, angry, confused, and lonely, she writes an article entitled, “Why The World Doesn't Need Superman," and wins the Pulitzer Prize for it. Then, Superman suddenly returns. Lois is still dating Richard. Jason is now a growing boy. And Lex, outfitted with a new gang, girlfriend, and yacht, returns to the Fortress of Solitude that he found long ago, prepared to initiate what he's waited and planned for 5 years to do: kill Superman.

Sounds epic, eh? And, look, not a single mention of General Zod. Oh, how I love SUPERMAN RETURNS.

See, I disagree. I don't necessarily POST on the SHH forum that much, but let me assure you, I have lurked here for QUITE some time now, ESPECIALLY on the SUPERMAN-related message boards, so I'm familiar with a lot of stuff that goes on here -- the typical complaints, nit-picks, etc. And one of the ones that I STILL see A LOT of haters complaining about is Singer's "vague history" idea. This is not to say that YOU disliked this idea, but when I see fans of RETURNS defend it, or try to explain it to the haters, it seems as though even THEY get it wrong and misrepresent what this flick is, making it seem all the more worse to the people who ALREADY hate this flick as it is. Now, I'm going to explain myself further below, but let me say that I firmly believe that RETURNS is more of a sequel to Donner's FIRST SUPERMAN film, and that's IT! Singer even said once in an interview that SUPERMAN II is not really in his "vague history" and he doesn't really even consider it to be that great of a movie. The way I see it, the first SUPERMAN film happens, then stuff in between that WE DO NOT SEE ON THE BIG SCREEN, Superman leaves, and then he returns in SUPERMAN RETURNS. So, really, all of the "references" to SUPERMAN II that people say are in RETURNS and that people claim make RETURNS a "vague" sequel to SUPERMAN II are, in fact, NOT REFERENCES TO SUPERMAN II AT ALL!! Let me explain...

You know, this is the ONE thing that you have against me. I went into RETURNS all four times that I saw it with the mindset that this is a loose sequel to Donner's first SUPERMAN film ONLY; however, having said that, I was a bit taken aback my first time when Kitty muttered this line when she and Lex were in the Fortress of Solitude. And, in all honesty, this is the SOLE thing, the ONE PIECE of evidence, that you guys have to back up your belief that RETURNS is even an iota of loose sequel to SUPERMAN II; however, having said that, there are TWO possible scenarios that could still make RETURNS a loose sequel to ONLY Donner's first SUPERMAN film, and not SUPERMAN II, too. First, who's to say that Lex actually HAS been to the Fortress of Solitude before? Kitty just said it SEEMED like he had been, it doesn't mean he actually has. After all, in the scene before they arrive, they are all on Lex's new yacht, possibly SEARCHING for the Fortress of Solitude. Secondly, OK, let's say he HAS been there before. Who's to say it was the time he was there in SUPERMAN II? It's entirely possible, and it is my strict believe, that after the events of Donner's first SUPERMAN film happen, Superman leaves, Lex becomes a free man because of this, and, somehow, for some reason, discovers and goes to the Fortress of Solitude. Lex plots and plans for Superman's inevitable return, and when the time is right, he RETURNS to the Fortress of Solitude (in RETURNS) and steals the crystals.

WRONG!! There is never ANY mention that Jason was conceived during the scene in SUPERMAN II where Superman takes Lois to the Fortress of Solitude -- not in the movie, not from Singer, not from ANYONE! And, in fact, as usual, the ONLY people to EVER suggest this was the case were nit-picky, continuity-obsessed fanboys. Seriously, guys, it's not that difficult to understand. Singer stated that he does not consider SUPERMAN II to be in the "vague history" of RETURNS!! It's so very easy to put the pieces together. Listen, like with the example above with Lex and the Fortress of Solitude, the events of Donner's first SUPERMAN film happen and afterward, as time passes, Superman does his same old stuff -- saves people, etc. Meanwhile, he and Lois grow closer and closer, until eventually, one night, he sleeps with her. Time goes by, and eventually, Superman leaves Earth without telling her. She meets Richard, gives birth to the baby, etc, and 5 years later, Superman returns! See? No SUPERMAN II involved AT ALL!!

[color=black]

OK, now THIS example is just idiotic, man. I mean, come on, I don't even HAVE to debunk this one. You basically say that because Lois doesn't know Clark is Superman in RETURNS, this automatically puts SUPERMAN II in the "vague history" because at the end of SUPERMAN II she doesn't know that Clark is Superman, either. Did you ever stop to think that she also doesn't know he's Superman at the end of Donner's first SUPERMAN film, either? So, RETURNS ALSO can take place after THAT flick, too! Why does Lois EVER have to find out who Superman is, just so she can forget it and not know who he is in RETURNS? Why, in the "vague history," do we HAVE to have her find out who he is? Why can't she just NOT KNOW AT ALL, like she does at the end of Donner's first SUPERMAN film. But you say that, well, she had sex with him in SUPERMAN II, or as I like to say, IN BETWEEN SUPERMAN and SUPERMAN RETURNS. Well, how exactly does THAT make sense? So, Superman cannot have sex with Lois without telling her his secret identity? This is how it happened, in my opinion -- as in the above examples, the events of Donner's SUPERMAN happen, time goes by as before, etc, Superman and Lois grow closer, and Superman eventually has sex with Lois...WITHOUT TELLING HER THAT HE'S ALSO CLARK KENT. Then...HE LEAVES!!

So here we have it folks!! This is MY interpretation of Bryan Singer's "vague history." He doesn't really like SUPERMAN II, and, well, I don't, either (although I cannot WAIT to see Donner's cut of the film -- THAT I am SURE I will enjoy and wouldn't mind if it were included in the "vague history" to SUPERMAN RETURNS. The only problem is it hadn't been released yet when Singer was making RETURNS. Oh, well).

Anyway, this is a recap of how it ALL happens: after the events Donner's first SUPERMAN film happen, some time goes by, Superman and Lois get closer, they eventually sleep together (and he does NOT divulge his secret identity to her), scientists announce that they think they've found Krypton, Superman leaves Earth without telling Lois, Lex Luthor then becomes a free man when Superman fails to show up at Lex's trial. Wondering where the man who ruined his life went, Lex embarks on a 5-year-long journey to discover more about his enemy, preparing for his inevitable return. In the process, he discovers the Fortress of Solitude. Meanwhile, Lois meets Richard, and she has a baby. Years later, hurt, angry, confused, and lonely, she writes an article entitled, “Why The World Doesn't Need Superman," and wins the Pulitzer Prize for it. Then, Superman suddenly returns. Lois is still dating Richard. Jason is now a growing boy. And Lex, outfitted with a new gang, girlfriend, and yacht, returns to the Fortress of Solitude that he found long ago, prepared to initiate what he's waited and planned for 5 years to do: kill Superman.

Sounds epic, eh? And, look, not a single mention of General Zod. Oh, how I love SUPERMAN RETURNS.

Superman Returns is a sequel to SII. Singer just said that as he wanted to deflect all the post film rumors that Jason is Supe's son as it was the big. secret revelation of this film. All through his career Singer had said that he had an idea for a sequel to SII, and Spacey had even said that on video when he was cast. Paraphrasing "Even when we worked on the Usual Suspects, Bryan was going around the set telling anyone would listen to his great idea of a sequel to Superman 2. So it is great that he is finally getting his chance to do it" So, SR is a direct Sequel to Supes 2. In fact, even Bryan said this would be Superman 3 in an interview while the film was in pre-production. This vague history B.S. was just so people didn't figure out that Jason was his son. But, like the Robert Downey Jr's cjaracter says in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (Paraphrasing) "Rules to Hollywood. If a character is in a movie, and they make a point to show him, he has something to do with it later on. Why do you think they made a point of showing the Cook's Assistant in hunt for Red October. Because he was going to be coming back into the film."

i think it would be interesting if the SR sequel would use an alternate version of the smallville.

Explanation: In smallville, we clearly see that zod is the main villian and brainiac's mission in the show was to come to earth and free his master. So Brainiac is his assistant, his "b*tch" what have you.

In SR, it would be interesting if they switched it. For instance, let's say for arguements sake that zod doesn't die in Supe2, he's in jail or something. Brainiac comes to earth and frees him, but this time Zod is working under brainiac to kill Kal-el, not the other way around.

I personally don't want either. just stick with brainiac or metallo or some combination sans zod. I would have liked it much more if metallo+lex was featured in the first one, and then 2 and 3 filmed together (just like POTC, and matrix) featuring brainiac and lex.

__________________"Now I'm not a religious person, but if you're up there....help me Superman!"-Homer"I'm a humble man, just like Jesus."-Colbert"Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment"-the Mechanic

How awesome would it have been if with SR, the entire marketing scheme, trailers, posters, everything had Mardsen's name be richard white, but during that introduction scene with Clark in SR, lois says the word John Corben instead of Richard White. I would have crapped my pants. Ofcourse, the rest of the movie would have to be different but still, i could dream.

__________________"Now I'm not a religious person, but if you're up there....help me Superman!"-Homer"I'm a humble man, just like Jesus."-Colbert"Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment"-the Mechanic

Zod is my favorite Superman villain and has been since I was four so I'm a bit of a mark for him. If it were a solid actor playing Zod, then I'd love to see him. If it was another villain, though, I wouldn't mind. I love a lot of the different villains from the comics. I'd like to see Darkseid, Metallo, Brainiac, Mxyzptlk, Mongul, Hank Henshaw, or Preus depicted in a movie. Like I said, Wey...as long as I'm happy with the end result, then I don't care who he fights. I go to watch Superman and not necessarily the villains. It used to be the opposite for Batman (until Begins fixed that for me, somewhat).

For instance, let's say for arguements sake that zod doesn't die in Supe2, he's in jail or something. Brainiac comes to earth and frees him, but this time Zod is working under brainiac to kill Kal-el, not the other way around.

I thought Zod WAS in jail at the end of Superman 2. The TV version of the movie showed the villains being taken away by police didn't it?

__________________Show me an X-Men comic where Mystique is the leader and walks round all day as a bored blonde